Well, you could easily phrase it along the lines of “I have a vague recollection of a fingerprint-based identification scheme that was blocked by Democrats; I think it was in the state of [your best guess], in the year of [your best guess] and involved [any detail you can vaguely recall, to the best of your ability]”, and if you get attacked for something as mild as that, then I’ll happily come to your defense. Further, any minor detail could help interested parties research the event, if it happened.
But if that is what you’re recalling, then it’s not exactly responsive to what Evil Economist was saying, which I gather was to the effect of offers of technical solutions to identification problems have always been rejected by parties whose unspoken goal was election manipulation. That some Democrats somewhere might have been on the rejecting side doesn’t challenge the premise, it just throws a tu quoque at it.
Heck, I’m willing to accept on no specific evidence at all that some Democrats have engaged in election manipulation as recently as a week ago, and plan to do so again next November.